Jump to content
JeanLucPicard

what does "vote neg to vote aff" mean?

Recommended Posts

I run a k aff, and I've seen this arg run against me many times usually paired with an accusation of performing the 1AC for the ballot. What does "vote neg to vote aff" mean exactly, and how should I answer it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the context of productivity bad affs, the idea is that voting aff is affirming an advocacy to do something. Whether that advocacy is disrupting productivity through poems or embracing hyper-conformity, an aff ballot affirms what the judge feels is the best course of action. Thus, in the context of this argument, voting neg truly affirms not being productive since you're not endorsing a new line of action, you're just endorsing maintaining the status quo and not doing anything.

 

In terms of answering this argument, you should say something about how your methodology is key to solvency. If you're trying to disrupt a system, you need to endorse that disruption to solve the impacts. Ignoring that line of action leaves the system in tact, even if it is counter productive.

Edited by DavidGriffith
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it's saying if the claims of the 1AC are true, the judge should vote Negative.

 

If we should really refuse education as a telos, we shouldn't debate for the purpose of winning.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it's saying if the claims of the 1AC are true, the judge should vote Negative.

 

If we should really refuse education as a telos, we shouldn't debate for the purpose of winning.

I find the hypothetical meritorious, but the first statement sounds like "We should win because they shouldn't be trying to win to begin with." 

 

On what merit should the judge uniquely default to the negative? I mean, this doesn't necessarily equate to "voting neg accomplishes whatever x purpose aff seeks to accomplish." It is just that I feel the negative hasn't proven any issue showing why it deserves the ballot over the affirmative, even if the affirmative shouldn't be trying to win the round.

Edited by Ausar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We should win because they shouldn't be trying to win to begin with." 

It's more like, from the Negative "we should win because THEY shouldn't want to win if they honestly believe productive education is bad."

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it less to be about “they shouldn’t want to win” more than “the fact that they want to win is a solvency deficit”. Like for instance, if you run a k aff with an identity based performance, the ballot itself makes your strategy toxic and artificial. This isn’t to say identity politics are toxic, but the tying of that to rewards is bad. For impact level, it usually ties into some suffering reps bad arg (specifically to rewards) like Baudrillard 94 or maybe Berlant. Solves the aff bc you’re not rejecting their performance or reps, you’re rejecting the aff ballot.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the easiest answer is that the ballot is just a site of libidinal investment in which the judge chooses to invest in certain modes of politics/non-politics/theoretical orientations. Value as a concept is inevitably to some degree, but the ballot really just indicative of an investment in the aff or neg's orientation or a divestment from certain ideologies.So in the instance you have a method thats beyond just "Unproductivity good" , you can just answer this argument with a defense of your solvency mechanism. All speech is performance and to say that the negs speech isn't performative and done for a ballot also seems just as arbitrary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×